Re: [bcn2004] Re: The Place of Scientific Objectivity in Historical Linguistics

Dear Tamer and friends, 

Merhaba.  You asked a good question.  Yes indeed there are many evidences that Homer's works have been revised and edited. Additionally, many names in Iliad are not Greek.  In fact they are broken up Turkic names. Most of the names have been invented as "character names" for the story and they are made up from Turkic expressions defining the "character" used in the story - but eventually they have all been Hellenized such that their Turkic origin is not recognizeable.  

Let me give you some citations about the ancient Greeks indicating their attitude and their life philosophy towards others.  The following citings given in "red" are from the book entitled "The Outline of History" by H. G. Wells, (Vol. 1, Garden City Books, garden City, New york, 1956).

-    p. 230: 
"These Hellenic tribes conquered and largely destroyed the Aegean civilization that had preceded their arrival;  upon its ashes they built up a civilization of their own."

Polat Kaya:  That ancient civilization that was already there when the wandering "Greeks" ("Aryan", from Turkish "Arayan", gezginci, Rum) was the civilization of Turanian Tur/Turk peoples. The Aegean civilization that those Greeks destoyed and took over belonged to the Turanian peoples. For example, the so-called "Minoans" of the island of Crete were Oguz people.  The name "Minoan" is from the name "Minos" more correctly from Turkish "Min OS" (Men Oguz) meaning "I am OGUZ").  Another form of this name "Minos" is MENES / MANAS . The Minoan cultural artifacts, such as the ones showing the attire of women from head-dress down to body garments,  indicate exact correspondence with those of the Turanians of Central Asia such as the Kazaks, Turkmens, Kirgiz, Özbeks and many other Turkish groups.  The top Minoan city name CONOSSOS shown on the maps is a distorted form of the Turkish "KONASH-OZ" (Günesh Oguz).

The name "HELLENE" or "HELLENES" for the Greeks is nothing but the restructured and distorted Turkish expression "ELLE-HEN" (Yelli Han meaning "Lord Wind") or like the Sumerian "EN-LIL" meaning "Lord Wind".  Hence this makes the ancient Greeks a "wind believing group" just like the ancient Semites.  That is why they are always mentioned almost together by the western writers.  Because Aryan Greeks (Arayans) and Semitic (Esmeciti) were both "wind" believing groups and had a life style like that of the "wind", that is, "wandering" all over the place, mixing up things, destroying and moving on to next action. 

These destructive wandering Greeks built on the ruins of the civilization that they destroyed and put up a "civilization" using the knowledge that they learned from those whom they destroyed.  Thus even the knowledge they used in their "new civilization" belonged to the old Turanian civilization.  They had nothing of their own to start with other than to know how to steal, destroy and lie about things. Of course, while they were the "barbars" themselves, they knew how to turn the tables around verbally and label the creators of the ancient civilization as "barbars", "uncivilized" and "primitive", etc.. This kind of lie and deceit culture of the ancient wanderers has come down to present times. 

-    p. 230:   
"We find all this distribution of the Greek affected before the beginnings of written history.  By the seventh century B. C. - that is to say, by the time of the Babylonian captivity of the Jews- the landmarks of the ancient world of the pre-Hellenic civilization in Europe have been obliterated.  Tiryns and Cnossos are unimportant sites;  Mycenae and Troysurvive in legend;  the great cities of this new world are Athens, Sparta (the capital of Lacedemon), Corinth, Thebes, Samos, Miletus.  The world our grandfathers called "Ancient Greece" had arisen on the forgotten ruins of a still more Ancient Greece, in many ways as civilized and artistic, of which to-day we are only beginning to learn through the labours of the excavator."

Polat Kaya: That obliterated civilization of ancient Europe was that of the Turanian Tur/Turk peoples. The name TIRYN is nothing but the Turkish name TURAN. The name THEBES is nothing but the Turkish word "TEPE" meaning "head".  The "seven gated city Thebes" is nothing but a representation of the human head which also has "seven gates" (i.e., 2 ears, 2 eyes, 2 nostrils and 1 mouth).  The name MYCENAE is nothing but the restructured and distorted form of the Turkish name "AY-KÜNEM" meaning "I am Moon and Sun" coined after the ancient Turanian Moon-God and Sun-God.  The city of Athens whose Greek form is ATHENAI or AI (Divry's mdern English-Greek and Greek-English dictionary, New York, 1988,  p. 31) is nothing but the restructured and distorted Turkish name "ATIN -AY" (ADIN AY) meaning "your name is Moon". The alternative name for this city is also the name "AI" which is nothing but the Turkish word "AY" for "Moon". 

-    p. 231-232:  
"Now this Greek civilization that we find growing up in South Italy and Greece and Asia Minor in the seventh century B. C. is a civilization differing in many important respects from the two great civilized systems whose growths we have already traced, that of the Nile {PK.:i.e., ancient Tur/Turk Masar/Misir civilization} and that of the Two Rivers of Mesopotamia {PK.: i.e. ancient Tur/Turk Sumerian civilization}. These civilizations grew slowly about a temple life out of a primitive agriculture; priest kings and god kings consolidated such early city states into empires.  But the barbaric greek herdsman raiders came southward into a world whose civilization was already an old story.  Shipping and agriculture, walled cities and writing was already there.  The Greeks did not grow a civilization of their own; they wrecked one, and put another together upon and out of the ruins."

Polat Kaya;  This is again an eye opener. What it means is that these ancient Greeks did just like what the Semitic wandering "Akkadian" did in Sumeria.  When they get the chance, they destroy an already established Turanian civilization, and then put up some new buildings with a differing style on the top of the ruins that they caused, and use the ancient Turanian civilization for their own use and propaganda, and then claim the whole thing as if it was their own with no mention of what was before and what they destroyed.  They kept villifying the creators of the old civilization and after a while, the old civilization was forgotten.  What was visible then became known as the "Greek civilization" and was pumped to the world as such - just like what the Semitics did in Mesopotamia (Babylon).   In plain terms this was nothing but daylight robbery of the much more ancient Turanian civilization by the ancient Greeks.  The same gimmick and use of sophistry towards Easterners  still continues to this day. To my recollection, its most recent example was the presentation of Turkish dances and songs of Eastern Anatolia to the world as "Greek dances, music and songs" during the 2004 Olympics in Athens.  Of course the European commentators lauded these dances as fantastic Greek dancing and culture while there was no reference to the name of the Turk whose dances were being stolen in front of the world, but more sadly in front of the "looking but not seeing" eyes of the Turks.  So Turkish civilization is still being usurped by the Greeks in broad daylight. 

-    p. 232;    
"To this we must ascribe the fact that there is no temple-state stage, no stage of priest kings, in the Greek record.  The Greeks got at once to the city organization  that in the east had grown round the temple.  They took over the association of the temple and city; the idea was ready-made for them.  What impressed them most about the city was probably its wall. It is doubtful if they took to the city life and citizenship straight away. At first they lived in open villages outside the ruins of the cities they had destroyed, but there stood the model for them, a continual suggestion."

Polat Kaya:    All of these tell us that the ancient Greeks did not create civilization but rather cunningly stole the civilization that was already there - by destroying it first and then building something different on it.  The same principle was also at work with the Greeks when it comes to their language and to their literary culture.  First of all, their language is totally made up from the Turkish language. In the conversion process the Turkish language words and phrases are destroyed first and then restructured and called as "Greek".  It is the same principle applied to the physical world. Destroy first and re-do and sell it as "Greek".   Even the name "GREEK" is akin to the Turkish word "KIRIK" (GIRIK) meaning "broken up".  That is exactly what the Greek language is and also the rest of the Aryan (Arayan) languages are, i.e., a restructuring of the Turkish language.  But of course, it should not be expected that those who did such a usurpation would voluntarily admit what they did. Since the whole European Aryans and the Semitic wanderers were in this act together with the Greeks, they always pumped up each other and villified the Tur/Turk peoples.  So much so that even the name of the oldest Turkish states, MASAR and SUMER, were converted into their names. 

Now with this background information, it is logical to think that the ancient Turanian literature was also first destroyed and then reconstructed as "Greek" or "Aryan" or "European" or "Semitic". I say that is also what happened in the case of Homer's writings which is said to be orally repeated and sung poems with stories. 

First of all HOMER was a so-called "BARD", that is, an "OZAN" (ASHIK) in Turkish.  This very ancient Turkish culture still lives in the Turkish world, but particularly in Eastern Anatolia and Azerbaijan. ASIK VEYSEL is one of the most renowned one of them all presently.  Asik Veysel was blind; so was HOMER.  This is also evident from his name "HOMER" which allegorically stands for the Turkish expression "AMA-ER" meaning "blind man". Of course "AMA-ER" is also an allegorical representation of the Turkish expression "O MA ER" meaning "he is magnificent man" which Homer was.  Additionally "O MA ER is the name of the ancient Turanian "Moon God".  Furthermore, the Moon was regarded as the "blind eye" of the ancient Turanian Sky-father-God .  That is why the Moon deity was "KÖR-GÖZ" while the Sun was the seeing fire eye (Sag GÖZ, KOR GÖZ, GÖR GÖZ) of the Sky-Father-God (GÖK ATA TANRI).  Thus it can be said with confidence that HOMER's name was also composed in Turkish after the ancient Turanian Sky-God deities - as many ancient king names (and men of literature) also did. 

In the Turkish Oguz Kagan Epic, Oguz Kagan says: " O Moon, let your name be "MA" from now on".  (Oguz Kagan destani, Line-245-246, W. Bang ve G. R. Rahmeti, Istanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Türk Dili Semineri Nesriyatindan, Istanbul 1936, Burhaneddin Basimevi, Osman Fikri Sertkaya, MAKALELER, Cilt I, Türk Kültürünü Arastirma Enstitüsü, Ankara, 1987) says;

245:     "ay, sen munda beg-ler-ge bolgil bashlik," 
246:    "ma  m(e)nglep senge ad bolsun kagar-lik". 

My rendition of this Uigur Turkish into Anatolian Turkish:

245:    (AY sen burada beglere bash ol) meaning "Moon, you stay here as head of lords"
246:    (MA sana ebediyen ad olsun) meaning "From now on to eternity, let MA be your name ". 

That is why the name of the moon is also "MA" (MAH) in Turkish which is also attributed to "Persian". Evidently this concept of "AY" (moon) being called "MA" comes from very ancient Turanian culture. 
After presenting this background information, now let us return to your question in which you asked:

"This is my question for today, do you indeed have the slightest evidence that Homer was altered after the invasion of Alexander the Great or is your statement stemming from a deduction or intuition?"

Polat Kaya: I do not have a written admission that Homer's works were Hellenized from another language. They would never admit to that. But, it is not only my intuition either.  We have the following ancient "Greek" names directly involved with the editions of the works by Homer.  Reference citings are shown in "red". 

See URL:


"Partially, the problems of context which relate to Homer's writings can be related to the reliance of Ancient Greek bards on an oral tradition. In the case of Homer, there is an obvious change from a completely oral tradition, toward an actual written script. This change meant several things to Homer's writing which remain in dispute. First, it is obvious that his original writings were as a result of spoken work, and were easily open to editing in later dates. Second, the oral tradition allows for embellishment of events and much more story telling leeway to achieve the desired effect of awe on a given audience; which in turn allows for the story to change from audience to audience. In these regards, the works of Homer cannot be thought of as actual historical works of the Trojan Wars and Bronze Age Greece (for example, historical discrepancies such as Iron axes found in Bronze Age Greece are written of in Homer's works), but more so as historical works which tell about the transition between bardic traditions, and further, the literary style of the time. Taken in this context and regard, Homer's works are utter masterpieces."

From URL:

"The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition 2001-05: Aristarchus of Samothrace c.217–c.145 B.C., Greek scholar, successor to his teacher, Aristophanes of Byzantium, as librarian at Alexandria. He was an innovator of scientific scholarship, and his critical revision of Homer is responsible for the excellent texts of Homer that survive. Though only fragments of his works survive (he is said to have written more than 800 volumes of commentary and exegesis), frequent quotations by ancient critics provide an insight into his subjects and method. His works cover such writers as Alcaeus, Anacreon, Pindar, Hesiod, and the tragedians."

>From URL:

"Tradition held that Homer was blind, and various Ionian cities are claimed to be his birthplace, but otherwise his biography is a blank slate. There is considerable scholarly debate about whether or not Homer was actually a real person, or the name given to one or more oral poets who sang traditional epic material.

It has repeatedly been questioned whether the same poet was responsible for both the Iliad and the Odyssey; theBatrachomyomachia, Homeric hymns and cyclic poems are generally agreed to be later than these two epic poems."

>From URL:

"Aristophanes Of Byzantium, born c. 257 BC died 180 BC, Alexandria, Greek literary critic and grammarian who, after early study under leading scholars in Alexandria, was chief librarian there c. 195 BC.

Aristophanes was the producer of a text of Homer and also edited Hesiod's Theogony, Alcaeus, Pindar, Euripides, Aristophanes, and perhaps Anacreon. Many of the Arguments prefixed in the manuscripts to Greek tragedies and comedies…"

>From URL:

"Aristophanes of Byzantium, c.257–180 B.C., Greek scholar. He was librarian at Alexandria, edited various texts, and reputedly invented the Greek diacritical marks. Aristarchus of Samothrace was his pupil."

>From URL:

"Zenodotus, Greek grammarian and critic, pupil of Philetas of Cos, was a native of Ephesus. He lived during the reigns of the first two Ptolemies, and was at the height of his reputation about 280 BC.


He was the first superintendent of the library at Alexandria and the first critical editor of Homer. His colleagues in the librarianship were Alexander of Aetolia and Lycophron of Chalcis, to whom were allotted the tragic and comic writers respectively, Homer and other epic poets being assigned to Zenodotus.


Although he has been reproached with arbitrariness and an insufficient knowledge of Greek, in his recension he undoubtedly laid a sound foundation for future criticism. Having collated the different manuscripts in the library, he expunged or obelized doubtful verses, transposed or altered lines, and introduced new readings. He divided the Homeric poems into books (with capitals for the Iliad, and small letters for the Odyssey), and possibly was the author of the calculation of the days of the Iliad in the Tabula Iliaca.


He does not appear to have written any regular commentary on Homer, but his Homeric lists of unusual words probably formed the source of the explanations of Homer attributed by the grammarians to Zenodotus. He also lectured upon Hesiod,Anacreon and Pindar, if he did not publish editions of them. He is further called an epic poet by Suidas, and three epigrams in the Greek Anthology are assigned to him."

It is unfortunate that the library of Alexandria was burned down by fanatic religious people.  Seven hundred thousand books were burned there and with that, the whole ancient Turanian civilization was burned down and obliterated.  With this man made desruction, any evidence for the Hellenization of the works of Homer also disappeared.  The burning down of the library was not accidental.  It was intentional and aimed to obliterate the ancient Turanian civilization as recorded in those books by the ancient Masarians.

Dear Tamer, with these references, it is clear that Homer's works were edited, altered, manhandled, changed and revised.  It is most likely that this was the Hellenization process which is not openly admitted. This is what I stated in my previous paper which you responded to. After all, since the ancient Greeks had the habit of first destroying the existing civilization and then building something different on top of it and calling it their own, and since they did the same thing in the case of manufacturing a Greek language for themselves by using Turkish as the source material, Hellenization of the works of Homer from the language of "Trojans" (Tur-Cans) could not be an exception. 

Best wishes to you and to all,

Polat Kaya


Kamil Kartal wrote:

Tamer Yilmaz <drtameryilmaz@...> wrote:

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 07:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tamer Yilmaz <drtameryilmaz@...>
Subject: Re: [Polat_Kaya] Re: [bcn2004] Re: The Place of Scientific Objectivity in Historical Linguistics


Dear Polat,


It has always been my suspicion that how much Homer's words may have been altered.  I am under the impression the Homer's writings have always been translated into Turkish from English and/or French.  If that is the case, then the cultural portion of the translation is pretty much totally lost.  I mean certain Anatolian beliefs and usages may have been suppressed, simply due to the fact that translators did not have cultural affinity towards the Middle East.  And, when our scholars translate a bastardized version, obviously they will be removed from the truth twice.


With your statement:


<< Homer's works have been "re-edited", in other words, altered completely after the invasion of Anatolia by Alexander the Great and afterwards. In this alteration, Homer's works have been "Hellenized".  Thus the ancient Turanian stories have become "European".  >>


you are going even one step further.  This is my question for today, do you indeed have the slightest evidence that Homer was altered after the invasion of Alexander the Great or is your statement stemming from a deduction or intuition?

Thank you very much. 


With great regards,


Tamer Yilmaz

Polat Kaya <tntr@...> wrote:


Dear Ram and friends,

Hi everyone.  I want to share the following names which will also be a response to Clyde Winters.

About the name TROY:

The Greek form of the name TROY is in the form of "TROIA".  Let us take a look at the construction of the word TROIA which is made up with two consonants followed by three vowels which is linguistically an unnatural situation.  The meaning of this formation is that the word has been intentionally  re-structured and distorted from an original source text.  Even when one vocalizes the name "TROIA", it is in the form of  "TUROYA".  

The Greek word "TROIA" is made of two parts in the form of: "TRO-IA" where "TRO" is a form of Turkish "TOR" (TUR) + the suffix "IA" meaning land, country, home" which is the distorted form of the Turkish word "ÖY" or "ÖYÜ" meaning "home, house, land, country".  Thus TROIA is really the restructured and disguised form of the Turkish name "TUR ÖY " or "TUR ÖYÜ" meaning "Tur home". TUR is the name of Tur/Turk peoples who are also known as OGUZ (OKUS) peoples.  The names TUR/TURK  and  TURAN are one and the same.

The Greek form of the English word "TROJAN" is given as "TRWIKOS" (Divry's, English-Greek, Greek-English Dictionary, New York, 1988, p. 354).  The name "TROJAN" is from Turkish "TUR CAN" where Turkish "C" has been replaced with the bogus letter "J" which is vocalized as "Y" in this case.  "TUR CAN" means "Tur man, Tur life, Tur people" where "CAN is "life, man, living being, people".  Latin word "GENS" meaning "a clan, stock, people, tribe, nation" is also a distorted form of Turkish "CAN" meaning the same. CAN has also been anagrammatized into English and/or Biblical name "JOHN" which in one sense means "life" and "soul". 

When the Greek name "TRWIKOS" where W = UU, is re-arranged as "I-TUR-OKUS" or "I-OKUS-TUR", we find both the TUR and OGUZ names of Turkish peoples embedded in this "Greek" word. One cannot help but wonder why? Evidently these correspondences could not be the result of chance events.  

Additionally, the expression "I-TUR-OKUS" or "I-OKUS-TUR" read as "AY TUR OKUS" (AY TUR OGUZ) means, from the religion point of view, that the "Moon is TUR and OGUZ". 

About the name "ILIUM":

The so-called "Greek" name ILIUM is actually the distorted form of the Turkish name "ILUM" or "ILIM" meaning "my country".  By this term Homer has declared that TROY was his country, and thus he was a "TUR man" rather than a "Greek", as his name "HOMER", which is from Turkish "ÖMER / OMAR", implies. 

Dr. Ilhami Durmus, a Turkish writer, in his book entitled, "Iskitler (Sakalar)", (Türk Kültürünü Arastirma Enstitüsü yayinlari, No. 141, Ankara, 1993, p. 100) indicates that one of the Iskit kings had the name HOMARGES which carries the name "HOMER / HOMAR / OMAR".

Homer's works have been "re-edited", in other words, altered completely after the invasion of Anatolia by Alexander the Great and afterwards. In this alteration, Homer's works have been "Hellenized".  Thus the ancient Turanian stories have become "European".  

Names using the "IA" suffix from Turkish "ÖY" or "ÖYÜ": 

We can give many other examples in this name formation.  For eaxmple:

a)    The name "TURKIYA" (TÜRKIYE) is made up from Turkish words "TURK" + "IYA" which is a form of Turkish "TURK + ÖYÜ" meaning "Home of Turks".  Indeed TURKIYA was in the past and still is the home of some millions of Turks in reality.  

b)    The name "THRACIA" is defined as "the country of Thrace" without referring to the name "TURK"or to an ethnic group, (Cassell's Latin -English Dictionary, MACMILLAN, USA, 1987, p. 223).  In this definition, the writer drags his foot in order not to mention the name TURK, and instead gives the Latin name THRACIA as versus the English name THRACE without any reference to whose country it was.   The adjective form of the name is given as "THRACIUS" as if it was an original language of "Latin". 

THRACIUS, when rearranged letter-by-letter as "TURCS-HAI", is the restructured and disguised form of Turkish name "TURK ÖYÜ" meaning "home of Turks".  Again the name "TUR/TURK" has been intentionally suppressed or camouflaged in the name THRACIA.

Similarly the name "THRACIA", when re-arranged letter-by-letter as  "TARC + HAI", is the rearranged and disguised form of the Turkish name "TURK + ÖYÜ" meaning again "home of Turks".

The BALKAN geograpy known as "THRACIA" has always been known as the home lands of Tur/Turk peoples. 

c)    The name "ETRURIA", which was the name of the country of Etruscans in the present day Italy, when separated as "TUR + ER + IA", is the distorted and disguised form of Turkish expression "TUR ER ÖYÜ" meaning "home of Tur man" (home of Turk man).  The alternative expanation is that the second "R" in "ETRURIA" could have been alphabetically upshifted from a "Q" - a trick that European linguists have used repeatedly.  This would make "ETRURIA" as "ETRUQIA" or "ETRUKIA" which means that it would have been constructed from the Turkish source "TURK ÖYÜ"

d)    The ancient city name TYRE, the chief city of Phoenicians, is again from the Turkish name "TUR E" meaning "home of TUR", where "E" is Sumerian "house, home" and Turkish "EV" (ÖY) meaning "house, home". 

e)    The ancient name of TRACHONITIS in the ancient Middle East (present day Jordan), that is, to the east of so-called "Sea of Galilee" from a map entitled "Palestine During the Ministry of Jesus",  p. 1647 of the book called "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures" by New World Bible Translation Comittee, 1984.)

The name TRACHONITIS, when re-arranged letter-by-letter as "TORC-HAN-ITIS", is the Turkish expression "TURK HAN IDI" meaning "they were Turk lords".  The suffix "-ITI, -ITE, -ITIS" is the Turkish word "iti / idi" meaning "it is". The name TRACHONITIS is just like the name "THRACIANS", that is, a different arrangement of the names of Turkish peoples so that they cannot be recognized as Turks.  This is more suppression of the name TUR/TURK by the wandering peoples. 

f)    The name ITURAEA, a group of peoples living in the area north of "Sea of Galilee",  (same map, p. 1647 of the same reference source). The name ITURAEA is very similar to the name "ETRURIA" of the land of Tur/Turk Etruscans. "ITURAEA" when rearranged letter-by-letter as "AI-TUR-EA" or "TURAY-EA" is the Turkish expression "AY TUR ÖYÜ" or "TURAY ÖYÜ" meaning "home of AY TUR" or "Home of TURAY".  The name TURAY or AYTUR is a widely used male name in the Turkish world.  Similarly "AYTURA" or "TURAYA" is female name used in the Turkish world.  These names also indicate the "moon worshipping" religion of ancient Tur/Turks.

g)    The name PEREA, east of Jordan River and the land where the "YARMUK river, the eastern branch of Jordan river, flows.  The name YARMUK is very much Turkish.  In fact it is the confused Turkish name "IRMAK U"meaning "it is river".  The name "PEREA" is the Turkish name "PER ÖY" (BIR-ÖY) meaning "Home of ONE" referring to the ancient Turanian "BIR-O" the Sky-God.  The Pharaohs of the ancient Tur/Turk Masarian state used this name in the form of "PERU" to describe themselves as God on earth.  Their palace was also called by the name "PERU", that is, Turkish "BIR ÖY" meaning the "King's house" or "God's house" (i.e., palace). For name Yarmuk River see map:

In this area, there was also the Scyhtian city called by the "Greek" name "Scythopolis" or "Beth-shean" city.  (see the maps on Internet):

h)    The name GALILEE, is an area containing two or more lakes where the big one is called "Sea of Galilee" (same map, p. 1647). When the name "GALILEE" is rearranged letter-by-letter as "GALLI-EE", it is the restructured and disguised form of the Turkish expression "GÖLLI ÖY" (GÖLLÜ ÖY) meaning "Home with lake" or 'land with lakes" which is the description of this area in Turkish.  See the web map:

i)    The name SAMARIA, west of Jordan River, (same map, p. 1647) is very much the distorted name "SUMERIA" which is known to be in the UR, URK area of Mesopotamia.  Evidently SUMERIA was not really dead by that time and the name had somehow re-established itself in this part of the Middle East. 

j)     The name JUDEA, the area west of the Dead Sea (same map, p.1647).  First of all there was no letter "J" at that time.  So to indicate this area by the name "JUDEA" is not truthful.  The letter J is a replacement for "letter "I" or "Y". When the name is rearranged as "UD-EAI", it is the Turkish name "OD ÖYÜ" or "UDU ÖY" meaning "Home of Fire" referring to the Turco-Sumerian Sun-God "UDU/UTU". 

About the name DEAD SEA:

About the DEAD SEA, "the salinity of this particular body of water is said to be about six times the salinity of normal sea water. Other names for the Dead Sea are Salt Sea, Sea of the Arava, Eastern sea, the Sea, Asphalt sea, Sodomitish sea, Sea of  Zoar, Sea of Overwhelming and Sea of Lot." (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1963, Vol. 7, p. 116-117).  Hence fish are not able to live in the waters of DEAD SEA.  In the maps, it is written with the name ASPHALTITUS.

As I see it, the name ASPHALTITUS is a misnomer as a cover up for its Turkish source. First of all the word "SEA" is a distorted and disguised form of Turkish word "SU" meaning "water". 

Additionally, when the name ASPHALTITUS is rearranged letter-by-letter as "TUS-SA-ALIPTH" (TUS-SA-ALIPTI) , where the letter H is an I, that is, I is down-shifted one letter to become H, it is found to be the disguised form of the Turkish expression "TUZ SU OLIPTI" (TUZ SU OLUPTU) meaning "it has become salt water" referring to the very salty water of this sea.  Hence the name "Salt Sea" in English has been coined.  Clearly the source of the name is Turkish contrary to all the misinformation being fed to the public.

Similarly, "TUS-SA-ALIPTI" is the disguised form of the Turkish expression "TUZ SU ÖLIPTI" (TUZ SU ÖLÜPTÜ) meaning "The salt water has died".  Hence the name "Dead Sea" in English has been coined. Again the source of the name "Dead Sea" is from Turkish source.  

Additionally, if the anagrammatizers used the consonant shifting technique and up-shifted the Turkish letter "N" to letter "P", then we would have the following situation: 

ASPHALTITUS, with H/I and N/P shift, and reaarranged letter-by-letter as  "TUSLI-TANIS-A", is the restructured and disguised form of the Turkish expression"TUZLI TENIZ O" (TUZLU DENIZ O) meaning "It is salty sea" which describes this very salty sea in Turkish.  The salinity of this lake being about six times the salinity of the ordinary sea water, rightfully makes it a "TUZLU DENIZ" (Salty Sea).  The name also has another embedded Turkish meaning in its structure.

ASPHALTITUS, with H/I and N/P shift, and reaarranged letter-by-letter as "ULI-TANISSTA", it is the restructured and disguised form of the Turkish expression"ULI TANIZTI" (ÖLÜ DENIZTI) meaning "it is dead Sea". This again is the name given to this inland sea to this day.  In either case the source of the name of this water body is unquestionably Turkish.  

Finding these Turkish names describing the water of this dead sea (su) in the name "ASPHALTITUS" (Dead Sea or Salt Sea) shows how Turkish has been intentionally usurped and changed in this part of the ancient Turkish Middle East by the cabalist groups. 

The question comes to mind, why are all these names found to be sourced from Turkish?  The answer to this question is that the area, since the most ancient times, was inhabited by the Turkish speaking Turanian peoples.  Writers, such as Rawlinson, have indicated that all these lands were inhabited by the ancient Turanians which includes the ancient Tur/Turk Masarians (falsely and deceptively called "Egyptians"), Canaanites, Phoenicians, Sumerians, Hurrians, Mitannies, and many more - plus some wandering Semites, Aryans (Arayans) and other wanderers who came to the area much later. 

From Clyde Winters' paper: "Col. Rawlinson the decipherer of the cuneiform writing makes it clear that the ancient Turanians were the "Hamitic Nations" mentioned in the Bible: Kush (Cush), Misraim (Egypt), Nimrud ( Sumerians and Elamites) and Canaan (Phonesians) (see: C.B. Rawlinson, "Notes on the early history of Babylon", Jour. Royal Asiatic Society (First Series) 15, p.230.)."} 

All this shows that the ancient Middle East was the homeland for many Turkish speaking Tur/Turk peoples as Col. C. B. Rawlinson also indicates when he classifies those ancient inhabitants as Turanians.  Of course, he somehow forgot to say that those Turanians were also Tur/Turk peoples who spoke Turkish since far reaching antiquity.  This way we have again proven that the native peoples of these areas were indeed Turanian Turkic peoples but they have been suppressed.  Trying to replace the name TUR/TURK of TURAN with the name "DRAVIDIAN" is another attempt to suppress the name of Tur/Turk peoples. 

Thus contrary to all the Greek, Latin, Jewish  and English identifications of the above discussed names, they were all ancient Turkish names from the ancient Turanian civilization which had spread all over Asia, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. These ancient Turkish names were intentionally altered by secretive people in order to disguise their Turkish origin and to transfer the ownership of that ancient Turanian civilization to non-Turanians. 

Best wishes to all,

Polat Kaya

Ram Varmha wrote:

The name Wilusiya is not Egyptian. (Wilusiya does not even sound like old Egyptian!). It was probably Luvian or of some other Hittite dialect.


In Ramses II's account of the battle of Kadesh, the 'drdny' are allies of the Hittites. Homer often calls the Trojans, Dardanoi.


Since the Egyptians did not add vowels to their written words, we do not know for sure how the word 'dr-dny' was actually pronounced. But, it does come quite close to 'tur oy'.






clyde winters <olmec982000@y...>
> From: clyde winters <olmec982000@y...>
> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: [akandabaratam] Fwd: Re: [bcn2004] Dialog Loga- Polat Kaya-6 : The Place of Scientific Objectivity in Historical Linguistics
> Hi Polat Kaya

> I can not argue with you about your interpretation of
> any word in any language because you make up words to
> suit your Turkic comparisons. None of the lexical
> items compared in your work have regular consonantal
> agreement and therefore must be rejected.
>     I will repeat, the ancient inhabitants of Central
> Asia were Dravidian speaking people. The Tocharians
> called themselves Kushan not Turk Han Oyi, therefore
> you can not claim affinity to this group based on your
> Turkic interpretation of Tocharian.
>     I must also disagree with your interpretation of
> the name for Troy. The word Troy has nothing to do
> with the original name of this Kushite city. The Greek
> term for this city was Ilion/ Ilium or Ilios. In
> Egyptian the name for Troy was probably Wilusiya, not
> Tur Oy.
> Clyde